ReviewPatient preference and adherence2026
Sexual Rehabilitation Interventions for Patients with Cardiovascular Disease: A Scoping Review.
Review in Patient preference and adherence, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This study systematically synthesizes the types, core components, and implementation characteristics of sexual rehabilitation interventions for patients with cardiovascular disease to inform the integration of sexual rehabilitation into cardiac rehabilitation and guide clinical practice. Methods: A scoping review methodology was employed, following the framework of Arksey and O'Malley and reported according to PRISMA-ScR guidelines. PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, CNKI, and Wanfang Data were systematically searched from January 2000 to December 2025. Based on the Population-Concept-Context framework, inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied. Literature screening, data extraction, and evidence mapping were performed. Results: A total of 29 studies were included: original research, systematic reviews, guidelines, scientific statements and research protocols. The included evidence primarily focused on patients with myocardial infarction or coronary heart disease and those undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, with some studies also involving patients' partners. Interventions were categorized into four types: (1) guidance-based interventions centered on sexual education and counseling; (2) psychological and behavioral interventions; (3) couple-based interventions; and (4) comprehensive rehabilitation integrated with cardiac rehabilitation. Most interventions were delivered by nurses or multidisciplinary teams, primarily through face-to-face interactions, with some utilizing remote methods like phone calls, video consultations, and mobile applications. Conclusion: Current sexual rehabilitation interventions mainly focus on sexual health education and counseling, while psychological and behavioral interventions and partner-assisted interventions have also been explored, with favorable outcomes reported in some studies. However, sexual rehabilitation remains fragmented and lacks integration into cardiac rehabilitation systems. Future research should promote standardization, explore integrated models, and leverage digital health technologies for individualized care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.